IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

V C^^

't ^'y'^

(<
^

f/.

1.0

•IT 1^ III 2.2

1 «- IIM

1.4 1.6

I.I

1.25

►

"^ ^>>'

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

■O'

f^^

- y*
#% >^ ^<\

'f\

■ 4?^

%f> _ MP^

CIHM/ICMH
Microfiche

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

D
D

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommag6e

□ Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculde

j I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

Coloured maps/

Cartes g6ographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 film6es.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires;

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage
sont indiquds ci-dessous.

I I Coloured pages/

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommagdes

Pages restored and/oi

Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxei
Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqudes

Pages detached/
Pages d^tachdes

Showthroughy
Transparence

Quality of prir

Qualiti indgale de I'impression

Includes supplementary materii
Comprend du matdriel suppl^mentaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

I I Pages damaged/

I I Pages restored and/or laminated/

I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/

I I Pages detached/

I I Showthrough/

I I Quality of print varies/

I I Includes supplementary material/

I I Only edition available/

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6ti film«^es d nouveau de fapon A
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est U\m6 au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

26X

30X

12X

1IX

20X

24X

28X

32X

tails
i du
odifier
' une
mage

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Library Division

Provincial Archives of British Columbia

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in Iteeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover whan appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol —^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"!, or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A la
gAnArosit* da:

Library Division

Provincial Archives of British Columbia

Les images suivantes ont 6ti reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at
de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film«, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimie sont filmAs en commenqant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
derniire page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second
ijtiat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont filmds en commengant par la
premiere page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la derni^re page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboies suivants apparaitra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, seion le
cas: le symbols — »- signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symbols V signifie "FIN ".

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
filmAs A des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 A partir
de Tangle supirieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mithode.

rrata
to

pelure,
nit

32X

V. ? -

S<ii

THE MANITOBA SGHOOk QUESTION.

BY JOHN S. EWART, Q.C.

In the July number of the Canadian
Magazine, I pleaded for libeity of
thought and opinion. As one argu-
ment, I suggested that possibly even
the cockiest bigot might be wrong;
and I mentioned a few out of the mil-
lions of o|)inions that had already gone
to the ditch. Might his not go, too ?
" I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ,
think it possible you may be mis-
taken." After seven pages, I sum-
marized the proposition to which I
had " been endeavoring to win as-
sent," as follows: — "(I) That human
thought is, even the best of it, upon
social and religious questions, far from
infallible; (2) That other people of
equal intelligence, who honestly differ
with us, are as likely to be right as
we are ; (3) That religious and irre-
ligious opinion is in the category of
the debatable . . .; (4) That the
true policy, with reference to all 8uch
<lue8tions. is that of perfect liberty;
for the onw,s ot proving the harmful-
ness of opposing opinion cannot be
tiischarged." Then follow four pages
wherein I applied these principles to
theschooh.

The Rev. Dr. Bryce, in the Septem-
ber number, makes reply, and that in
the very simplest manner possible. He
puts into my pages opinions and con-
tentions that are not there, and, so far
as I am aware, I never entertained ;
and then, without much eflfort, victori-
ously confutes them. He might have
spared himself the confutation, for the
poor, miserable things, with all possi-
ble shifts, straddles, and devices, could
never have stood upright, even if left
alone. The worthy Doctor would have
accomplished all his purpose, had he
contented himself with saying, in a
single sentence, "Mr. £ wart's whole
article is a foolish defence of the geo-

centric theory." Mydiscomfiture would
thus have been sufficiently apparent
to all men, without wasting pages to
disprove the antiquated absurdity.

Not that Dr. Bryce had the slightest
intention of misrepresenting me. He
is merely a singularly good example
of that " incapacity to appreciate and
sympathetically understand an opinion
contrary to his own," to which I re-
ferred in July. Instead of either un-
derstanding my argument, or telling
me that it was something " no fellow
could understand," he flings a heap of
wretched inanities at me, saying :
Your opinion is that "my right is
your wrong ; my wrong is your right.
One for me is as good as the other for
you. There is no fixed right. There
is no hope of reaching a common
standard . . . Plainly Mr. Ewart
believes there is no common standard
of opinion; that there can be no con-
census of right ; that there can be no
invariable principle in man which can
serve as a basis of agreement, and
hence of truth. That being the case,
then each must be allowed to believe
and act as he likes. Absolute, unre-
strained liberty to do as he may choose
must be given him. He might just
as well have atlded, "And Mr. Ewart
believes that alligators are Divine em-
anations, and ought to be protected
with forty-five per cent." He seems
to say : —

" As for you,
Say what you can, my false o'erweighs your
true."

In order to justify his ascription to
me of these absurdities. Dr. Bryce
quotes four passages from ray article.
They are as follows (numbered and
italicised) : —

First Passage. — "// we cannot d«-
cide (and Mr. Ewart nays we cannot

f«ovi,\ci.^L kmms of

ftc.

IO«

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

(i<;ride)whefJier the. opinions arc harm
fid or innocent, A has as much riijhl
to have his way as Ji, has he not f"
What opinions was I alluding to ?
Whether alligators are emanations, or
not ? Whether A. is to have "abso-
lute and unrestrained liberty to do as
he may choose," or not ? No, neither
of them ; but whether atheistical opin-
ions are so certainly harmful to society
as to warrant the State in suppressing
them. That is what I said could not
be decided. Was I not right?

Second Passage: — " Vour opinions
are not entitled to one whit 1/ rente r
deference or respect than are the opin-
ions of others." If Dr. Bryce refuses
to admit "that other people of equal
intelligence, who honestly difler with
him, are as likely to be right as he is,"
then, in all politeness, I shall make nn
exception in his favor. With tins
qualification, I believe the statement
to be perfectly accurate. Nevertheless
I will reverse it entirely, if he wishes,
and say that every person's opinions
o,re entitled to 'greater deference and
respect than are the opinions of others."
But it must be understood that the
(change was made to oblige Dr. Bryce.
Plato, more modest than the Doctor,
would have said: (a) "To be absolutely
sure of the truth of matters concern-
ing which there are many opinions
is an attribute of the Gods, not given
to man, stranger; but I shall be very
happy to tell you what I think."

Third Passage: — "Religions and
irreligious opinion is in tlie category
of the debatable ; the true policy with
reference to all such questions is per-
fect liberty." With the same under-
standing I will reverse this, too. I
shall say: Religious questions are not
"in the category of the debatable;"
that from the time of Elijah and the
prophets of Baal, down to the time of
Prof. Briggs and Prof. Campbell, they
never have been debated. 1 slxall
further say that " the true policy with
reference to all such questions is" not

(o) Laws, Bk. I.; Jowett's Trans. IV., 172.

that of liberty at all, perfect or other-
wise ; but that of the Doctor's ( 'onfes-
sion of Faith in the words following :
" The civil magistrate . . . hath au-
thority, and it is his duty, to take
order that unity and peace be preserved
in the church ; that the truth of Ood
be kept pure and entire; that all blas-
phemies and heresies be suppressed ;
all corruptions and abuses in worship
and discipline prevented, or refcjrmed;
and all the onliuances of God duly
settled, administered, and observed.
For the better effecting thereof, he liath
power to call .synods, to be present at
them, and to provide that whatsoever
is tran.sacted in them be f^iording to
the mind of God."

It must, however, again be most
distinctly understood that the change
was made to oblige Dr. Biyce. (I tind
my.selt still muttering .something like
"H pur si muo>\'. ')

Fourth Passage:^"/?}, the name
of liberty, I tvould say to the parents :
Certainly you have the right to teach,
or have taught, to your children any-
thing you like, so long as you can
agree about it." Robbed of all its own
context, and surrounded with a totally
different one, this sentence might be
taken to mean, that I thought that
parents were acting quite properly,
did they teach their children "False-
hoods, thieveries, iniquities, injustice,
disloyalty, anarchic tendencies." With
its own context it is plainly limited to
Imperial Federationisui, Militarism,
Pietism, Sabbatarianism, Anti-alco-
holism, and every otiier ism of -iack
like you can think of.

These are the four quotations to
prove that one of my principles must
be that " absolute, unrestrained liberty
to do as he may choose must be given
him." Of course they are laughably
worthless for that purpose ; but they
serve excellently another (probably
not intended), namely, to show with
what extraordinary fitness the Doctor
selected, for his opening page, the
words "Lord, thou knowestgif I dinna
gae richt, I'll gang far wrang." In

fut

KU<
ll

lia

IJ'

THE MANITOBA SCHOOL QV EST ION.

109

ihcr-
ifes-
m^ :
aii-
take
"ved
Ood
las-
sed

li.Iy
ved.

future he can apostrophise all Canada
aK well.

liut he goes much further " wrang "
than this. Having tripped up quite
huowrh^fully the rickety Aunt Sallys,
that the first passing butterfly would
have tumbled over, he proceeds to
enunciate three propositions which he
hsiya are "in opposition to these views."
Three propositions — every one of them
H.H certain, as well known, and as
br'«<l-l)«sed as Ararat, Blanc or his
own Nevis ! Three propositions — and
not one f»f them in opposition to any-
thing — so far as my views are con-
cerned. On the contrary, while the
first of them is as irrelevant as would
\jti any proposition in Euclid, the other
two are among the foundations of my
July argument. These are the three
''numbered consecutively and italic-
ized):—

r "That the State has a right to
form, and enforce, an opinion, at
<:o.r'm.i,r.e vjith. the opinions of many
of 'iXh "^'^'jeilH" Why this platitude,
rather than any other — " Some things
are gfx>'l to eat," for example — I cannot
imagine, "The State has a perfect
right to form, and enforce an opinion"
t'lM/n Home, mattera "at variance with
the opinion-s of many of its subjects,"
w, surely, what the Doctor intends.
He do*,-?* not mean that the State ought
U> form, and enforce, an opinion ujton
<M matters — upon the literary value
of the Fsalms, upon the use of meat
on fast-days, upon attendance at
church, etc. He does not advocate
(probably) the return to Acts of Con-
formity, and Test Acts. His proposi-
ti'm, if intended to be universalis un-
questionably wrong. If intended to
U; litniU;d, it is perfectly correct, but
at the same time perfectly worthless;
for there always remains to be proved,
that the matter under discussion is
one of those upon which the State may
form aiifl enforce an opinion. " Far
« rang : "

n, 'The writer fwrther rontend-f
lliiU the State, being founded onjastiee,

may not give sper'ud iirivilegex to ninj
class of its siilijeilH." Most certainly.
Doctor ; that is what I was hitting at,
and you were objecting to, when I
said: "A has as much right to have
his way as B., has he not?" "Your
opinions are not entitled to one whit
greater deference or respect, than are
the opinions of others;" and "The true
policy with reference to all such ques-
tions is perfect liberty." A few pages
ago you said that "these are the ele-
mentary principles of anarchy." What
do you think of them now? "No
special privileges to any class of its
sulijects," — let us adhere to that, for it
is good.

And it is not in the least opposed to
my views, as the Doctor .«eems to think.
He says: "What does Mr. Ewart pro-
pose? He proposes that the people of
Manitoba .should have their public
schools, and that one denomination
should be singled out, and Vje allowed
to teach their 'isms,' in certain schools,
to be controlled by them." To which
I can only reply that I never proposed
any such thing; or anything having
the faintest resemblance to it, and that
the whole drift of my article is entirely
opposed to any such notion, and di-
rectly contrary to any such contention.
"Far wrang!" "Far wrang I"

The Doctor tries in another way to
make it appear that my purpose is as
he alleges. He says that I " was
most strenuous, when pleading the
Jioman Catholic position l)efore the
courts, in insisting that Episcopalians
and Presbyterinns had no rights in the
same way." Which is to say, that be-
cause I argued as to the meaning of
certain words, in a certain statute,
therefore my contention must be that
that statute, with that certain mean-
ing, upon abstract principles is just
and good. Far, "far wrang" again!
A lawyer might argue as to the mean-
ing of one of Dr. Bryce's sermons
surely, without Ijeing compelled to
justify it '. But the J>oct<jr is wrong,
not only in his logic, but in his facts.
I did not so argue, for I was not even

1B34!)4

J iO

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

fcnf,'iiged in the case in which the ques-
tion was debated. Once more " far
wraag ! "

Why does not the Doctor tell me
that my real object is to destroy all
belief in an isosceles triangle ? And
why, at all events, does he not doggedly
adhere to that method of arguing,
rather, at all events, than change to
another very much worse ? For, on
the whole, I would much rather be
told that I had said something that I
did not, than have it alleged that tl:e
" mild, gentle-faced tolerance that Mr.
Ewart pleads for, is not the reality for
which he is arguing." This means,
either that I am endeavoring to mis-
lead, or that I do not know what I am
arguing for — sufficiently uncomfort-
able horns both of them. I take com-
fort, however, in the fact that it is the
" far wrang " Professor that so charges
me, and the chances are infinity to one
that he is " far wrang " again.

But what is this dreadful, or evasive,
*' reality, for which " I am arguing —
this thing too horrible to mention, or
too elusive for common apprehension ?
Veritably this : a desire to place the
schools " under the control of the
church " — that is, under the same kind
of control as is the college in which
Dr. Bryce has spent th*^ best part of
his life, as a most wortl./ and estima-
ble professor ! He sees nothing im-
proper in his school being governed
by a church, but deems the design of
a similar government for other schools,
a |>urpose altogether too heinous for
public acknowledgment. Were he the
Profe.s.sor of "far wrang" (and I do
not think he ever did lecture on ex-
egesis), he could not go much further
" wrang " than this, surely ? He may
endeavor to distinguish. He will say
that his school is sustained by private
subscription. The distinction does not
appeal to me as having much validity.
Some of my income goes directly to
the support of his school, and some of
it indirectly (through the tax-collector),
to the support of the other schools. To
me, it is either well, or ill, that all these

schools should be under church gov-
ernment — well or ill, that is, for the
pupils. Whence como the salaries, can,
by no means, affect the benefit or dis-
advantage to the children. He may
urge, too, that theology is taught in
his college, and that there is, therefore,
for it, a necessity for church-govern-
ment. But I do not refer to the theo-
logical department of his college, which,
in numerical proportion, is but an ad-
junct of it; but to the larger body of
the institution, the part in which the
Doctor himself laboi-s so successfully —
to the ordinary every-day school for
general education. Is church govern-
ment for such schools well, or ill. Doc-
tor ? You spend a little of your time
arguing for the suppression of them,
because (1) " the only hope for the pro-
vince was to * * have a vigorous
effort made to raise up a homogeneous
Canadian people ; " and (2), " in order
to make us a united people, a patriotic
love of our province demands this ex-
pedient ; " and you employ the main
energies of your life in working in,
and seeking support for, a particular
school of that very class. I know that
you can distinguish again, and that
your church is always right, and the
others always wrong; so do not tell
me that. But, " I beseech you, in the
bowels of Christ, think it possible that
you may be " gone " far wrang ! "

I say that this, the second of the
Doctor's propositions, is not only not
opposed to my views, but that it is
one of the foundations of my July ar-
gument ; and I further say that it is
entirelj'^ opposed to the action of the
Manitoba Government.

Let us suppose that there are in a
community three classes of persons,
each with desires and ideas in refer-
ence to education. There are (A) those
who desire it to be purely secular ; (B)
those who desire to have a certain
spice, or flavor, of religion in it ; and
(C) those who desire to have it dis-
tinctly religious-history-taught, as in
the Old Testament (God acting all the
time), and not as in Gibbon (chance

an<i
|)oc

IHE MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION.

Ill

I'Ch frov-

for the
rie.s, can,
t or dis-
He may

ami circumstance at play). And now,
|)f)ctor, what I want to know is : How,
upon the " no special privilege " plan,
you pick out B, and determine that Ae
must have his way ? Do you say that
B is in the majority ? Very well, then
we must amend our principle, and say
" that the State may not give special
privileges to any class of its subjects,"
except the muijority. Is it right now ?
If you think so, take it down to Que-
bec, set it to work, and watch it a little
while. You will change your mind !

III. The last of the broad-based
propositions (said to be opposed to my
contentions), for which the Rev. Doc-
tor contends is, " That religion is out-
side of State interference, unless reli-
gion invade the State's domain." But
this is not opposed to my contentions.
On the contrary it is one of them, and
the one to which I constantly make
appeal as against the action or the
Manitoba Legislature. What did that
Legislature do ? There were two sets
of schools in existence — in one was a
little religion suitable to Protestants,
and in the other a little more religion
suitable to Catholics. Under such cir-
cumstances, if the Doctor desires to
know " What could patriotic Manito-
bans do ? " I can have no objection to
say, that if in the name of patriotism
(or of all biology), they felt bound to
aboILsh the one set of schools, and to
strengthen the other, they could not
have hit upon a more stupid reason
for their action than that " religion
[all religion that is] is outside of State
interference." Any flrst-come law of
dynamics (the science which treats of
the action of force), would have been
much more appropriate. Surely, far
"far wrang! "

For religion has not been removed
from the schools. Episcopalian and
Presbyterian Synods thank God an-
nually that it is still there ; while Ro-
man Catholics bemoan its character.
At present religion is taught, but
taught perfunctorily, indirectly, cir-
cuitously, and as though people were
ashamed of it. This may be taught,

and that may not. The Bible may be
read, but it must be read " without
note or comment." The meaning of
words probal ly cannot be given ; the
local customs, or notions, must not
be referred to; the connection with the
previous chapter must not be pointed
out. Christ's life is to be read in this
foolish fashion, and in detached
snatches, with a minimum of ten ver-
ses at a time ; but no one must say a
word to help the children to under-
stand or appreciate it. All which, to
my mind, is worse than making a fet-
ish of the Bible; it is making a bore
and an annoyance of it Why doe.s
not .some Educationist propose that
History or Philosophy be taught in
the same way ? There must be no
note or comment on the Bible ; but,
on the other hand, some of the means
to be employed for " instruction in
moral principles," are "stories, memory-
gems . . . didactic talks, teaching the
Ten Commandments, etc." Should the
Professor again write upon the School
question, I beg of him to tell us,
(1) Whether, working under these pre-
scriptions, religion is, or is not, taught
in the schools ; (2) Whether religion
ought to be taught in the schools ; and
(3) If yea, how it comes that his
maxim, " that religion is outside of
State interference," leads to State-dir-
ected religion in State schools. And
let me anticipate one of his replies:
" Yes, there is religion in the schools,
but it is purely of a non-sectariaji
character." I shall still (1) ask him to
apply his maxim, or to submit to its
amendment, so that it shall read "Reli-
gion, o<Aer than non-sedarianreligion,
is outside of State interference ;" but
further, (2) 1 shall beg him to remem-
ber (as said D'Israeli) that, " a non-
sectarian religion is a new religion."
" Non-sectarian " is it ? Look at the
" Form of Prayer," and tell me if any
Jew or Unitarian would join in it.
Read at one sitting a Presbyterian and
a Roman Catholic catechism ; and see
what they would respectively make of
'■ teaching the Ten Commandents."

112

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

Will J)r. lirvcu say tliat lie would con-
sent to Uonian (^'atholics, in their way,
" tuacliing the Ten (Jomniandments" to
PniU'stant cliililren ? Of course he
will not, but he thinks it quite right
in the name of " patriotism," and of
" homogeneity," and of " a united peo-
ple," to re(iuire Roman Catholic child-
ren to take their ideas from Protestant
teachers. As he says, " a patriotic
love of our province demands this ex-
pedient." "Far wrang!" "Far wrangl"
Toujours perdrix !

One more etJbrt to make myself
understood. In my July article, quot-
ing from Dr. Bryce, I said, that of the
Catholic school districts, " all but a
very small percentage, are in localities
almost entirely French." And I a hied,
"Manitoba has said to a large section
of her people": Unless you undertake
to stop teaching 3'our own religion, to
your own children, in schools to which
no one goes except those of your own
faith, we will not permit you to organ-
ize yourselves together for the instruc-
tion of those in whose education the
whole couimunity has a decided inter-
est." This is too true to be denied, and
the Doctor does not deny it. He con-
tents himself with denying the motive
which actuated it. Let the motive go;
there is the fearful fact. Catholics
are thrown upon voluntary effort, and
subscription, unless they will abandon
that which, is to them a sacred duty. If
this be not intolerance and persecution,
then the world never .saw those horrid
monsters and never will see them.

Dr. Bryce helps me splendidly here:
" Probably most would say that should
Roman Catholics or others desire to
educate their children in private
schools at their own expense, so long
as illiteracy does not result it would
be well to allow it." There are three
conditions — (1) "private .schools"; (2)
" at their own expense ; " and (3) " so
long as illiteracy does not result."
The difference between private and
public schools (apart from expense) is
that in the latter there is public in-

spection and oversight, a connuon
standard, control by the vote of the
people. It could be no reason for not
allowing Roman Catholics to educate
their children that they were willing
to permit public inspection and over-
sight, to adopt the common standard,
and to substitute control by the pooi)le
for control by the church. Upon the
contrary, this would evidently re-
move an objection (juite formidable to
many minds, and make Manitobans
all the more willing, one would think,
to allow the Roman Catholics to pro-
ceed in their own way. Shall we,
therefore, rub out the first condition '.
By so doing we shall also dispose of
the third, shal! we not ? Where are
we now ? We have Catholics in pub-
lic schools, under public regulation,
governed by the pcoi>le, working up
to a common standard. Well, then,
the only condition left is — "at their
own expense," and they (mirabile
dicta) unanimously reply, "Why, cer-
tainly ! We do not want a sixpence
of anybody's money but our own."
What do they propose ? Merely this,
(they are not beggars, although most
of them are poor), tliat they should
be allowed to organize them.^elves for
the purpose of taxing themselves to
raise money for their own schools.

Take an example. In the district
of X. there is an exclusively Roman
Catholic population. Up to 1890
there was a State school there. To-
day there is none. (This is what is
known as providing " one public
school for each hjcality.") The peo-
ple, therefore, pay no taxes for school
purposes at all. They contribute
voluntarily, but not in a sufficiently
systematic way, for the purpose of
providing private education for their
children. They want power to tax
themselves, in order better to support
their schools^ — schools which shall
have all the qualities of public schools.
And Manitobans (" us Mr. Ewart
knows, are a generous people ") reply :
" Certainly you may do .so, but upon
one condition. You must promisi; to

THE AfAXnO/i.t SCHOOL QUESTION.

11?

ininoii
of tlie
or ant.
tlucato
williiifT

over-
ndaid,
poo|)le
on the

y 'e-
able to
tobaiis

read the bd)lc ' witliout note or coni-
tnont ' of any kind, and either refrain
troni teaching; religion altogether, or
else adopt and teach tlii^ enittHCulaled
thinj,' called ' non-sectarian religion.'
This is our ultimatum. Accept, or go
and bo hanged — you and your child-
ren." " A patriotic love of onr pro-
vince demands this expedient, " coolly
adds Dr. Bryce, seated comfortably in
his .study, and continues to act on
the exact contrary of " this exped-
ient."

In addition to the right to tax
themselves, and as something which
Manitobans may or may not, accord-
ing to their sense of justice (no one
asks for generosity), withhold, the
Catholics further propo.se this : Out of
public funds there is paid to each
.school a certain sum in aid of the
amount raised by taxation. These
public funds belong to the peo|)le,
Protestants and Koman Catholics
alike, and " the State, being founded
on justice, may not give special privi-
leges to any class of its .sulijects." The
people of district X say : Give us our
share. We will conform to all your
secular requirements, to inspections,
to regulation.s, to standards; "Religion
is outside of State interference ; "
leave it, therefore, outside of your
regulations. Pay us our share, if in
every respect we do the proper and
efficient work of a secular school.
And " generous " Nfanitobans reply :
No ; your school may be the best in
the Province, but you will not get a
cent if you comment on the Bible.
When we said that " religion was out-
side of State interference," we meant
that the State could quite properly in-
terfere with the teaching of religion,
and that, by one of the most drastic
of penalties, namely, the threatened
illiteracy of your children, it could
with the most perfect justice, indeed,
in the exercise of much generosity,
prevent Catholics teaching Catholic
children the Catholic religion in the
only way in which Catholics believe
it can effectively be done.

Let us dissect a little this .seem-
ingly simple propi sltioii, " Religion is
outside ot State • 'terference," and let
us distinguish, because in r?o/ under-
standing it, simple as it is, lie many
dithculties fur many people. Cuizot
says" that Chixrch and State htive
maintained four forms of relations to
one another: — (1) "The State is
.subordinate to the Church ; " (2) " It is
not the State which is in the Church
Vuit the Church which is in the
State ; " (3) " The Church ought to
be independent, unrestricted in the
State ; the State has nothing to do
with her ; tHe temporal power ought
to take no cognizance of religious
creeds ; " (4) " The Church and the
State are di.stinct societies, it is true,
but they are at the same time close
neighbors, and are nearly interested in
one another; let them live separate
but not estranged ; let them keep up
an alliance on certain conditions, each
living to itself, but each making sacri-
fices Tor the othei' ; in case of need each
lending the other its support."

Many people apprehend clearly
enough the two first situations, but the
last are usually jargogled together.
And yet what a wide difference between
them. Under the one principle, a man-
of-war goes to sea, and many of her
crew go to their graves beneath the
water, without the services or ofKces of
a clergyman. Under the other, the
State recognizes the (avi of religion
(although refusing to .'<ay anything as
to its truth), and, among each ship's
officers, places one of the spirituality.
The State in this case iias regard to the
wantsof the crew. Even as provision
is made for food and raiment as wants,
.so provision is made for dc facto spir-
itual wants. It may be consideretl by
many to be a very foolish thing to wish
to have a clergyman with you on a
battle-ship ; even as others think it
very absurd to want " baccy " or grog.
But the State recognizes the existence
of these wants (not their wisdom), and

rt Civilization in France, l^ei't. 3, Vol. I, p. 817, and see
Uct. 12, Vol. II, p S!.

V.[iO\':i\iL:L /uJliiiVci Ot. b. U

114

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

refiixex the men noitlicrtlie onenortlie
otiior. A<,^iin, imkIit tlie one piitifiplo,
till' tmnio of (j()(l, and oveiytliiii}^
wliicli could 8iij:jf(.'st tlio fact ol ro-
lii,n()n, is excludoil iVoiii tlie schools.
VVhilo under the other, the State takes
co^'niz'ince of the existence of religion ;
find tilt! WMnts ot the parents rospect-
int( it aie, so far ns |)ra(!ticaV)Ie, recog-
idzed and iicceded to. Tin- distinction
is now, I think, sufficiently clear.
Which of them is eorrect ? To my
mind, he who is actuated liy the true
spirit of liherty will undoubtedly
choose the lattoi-.

With this understanding, let us re-
turn to Dr. Bryce's proposition, " He-
ligion is outside of State interference.''
By this is properly meant tlmt, re-
volving as they do in different orbits,
they oui,dit not to collide with, or clash,
or oppose one another. Jt does not
mean that one can deny the existence
of the other, or act as though it did not
exist, or invade the territory of the
other, saying, " Make way, for we nius
not collide." It means, so far as the
State's action is concerned, that the
fad that religion exists must be recoir-
nizcii ; and that in so far as its orderly
observance and propagation are con-
cerned, it is "outside of State inter-
ference." Doctor Brj'ce himself con-
cedes that "on the whole, the trend of
modern thought is to allow as great
liberty as possible to religious opinion."

Let us go back to District X. Prior
to 18!)0, the .school there was under
State control and governance ; the
people taxed themselves to support the
school ; and, according to the secular
work accomplished, they obtained the
same assistance from public funds that
other schools received. In addition to
secular instruction, the children were
taught the way of salvation, as be-
lieved by the parents of every child in
the school. The State, true to prin-
ciple, interposed no obstacle. It al-
lowed as "great liberty as possible."
It did not interfere. It did not oppo.se.
It did not object. Then Manitobans
("as Mr. Ewart knows, a

people ") informed these \wov parish-
ioners, that unless they would cease
telling the cliildien aliout Jesus, they
would be deprived of tlxir organiza-
tion, they would lose their share ui
the publie moneys, atKi might get
idong as best, 'or as worst,) tliey could.
Since then, I lie Government (the people
have not yet approved the step) has
hail the astounding hardihood to send
ai'euts to these poor people to sympa-
tliize with them, and to urge them to
forego their conscientious convictions,
in order that they may have the pe-
cuniary advantages of which, for their
religion's sake, they were deprived.
Than this,history records nothing more
intolerant, and, but that it is done
without proper reflection, more base. I
use the word deliherately. These
people have been taught to believe, and
do most thoroughly believe, that it is
their duty to provide a certain kind of
education for their cliildren. It is not
proposed to remove this belief by argu-
ment. It is proposed to tempt these
peoi)le with money to act contrary to
their belief If the word " base" is not
too strong to apply to the Judas who
exchanges conscience for mere cash ;
does not the tempter who, to accomp-
lish a base betrayal, appeals to the bas-
est of motives, also richly merit the
same word.

And is it not in the last degree ex-
traordinary, that of all principles, social
or scientific, mundane or divine, or
other whatsoever, the one which most
strongly and clearly condemns such
gro.ss interference with religious lib-
erty — Religion is outride of State in-
terference — is the very principle select-
ed byDr.Bryce to support it ? We must
leave him, venturing and proffering
this suggestion, namely, that if at any
time he does " heartily join in the
piayer of that fellow-countryman, who
pleaded for heavenly direction, .saving,
' Lord, gif I dinna gae richt. Thou
knowest I'll gang far wrang,'" the
proper hymn for the occasion would be,
in my humble opinion, " For those at
sea" — far, far at sea. Failing relief

THE MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION.

' paiisii-
l<l cease
ms, thev
I'gariiza-
liaie of
j,'lif- get
!y rould.
e people
i'|»; has
to send
syrnpa-
tlii'in to
victions,
tlie pe-
Tor their
priveij.
iiir more
is (lone
J base. I
These
eve, and
lat it is
kind of
Jt is not
)>' (irgu-
)t these
[laiy to
e" is not
ias who
•e easli ;
iiccoinp-
tlie bas-
erit the

by tills uietliod, I aui afraid nothing
remains but the traditional surgical
operation !

Si (|uid per jocum dixi, nolito in
scrium convertere ; for

Though they may gang a kennin wruog,
To step aside Ih human.

The few passages of my July article
wliich escaped misconstruction at the
hands (S Dr. Bryce, have, at those of
Mr. Lo , .ueur shared the general fate.
This latter gentleinan seems to tliink
that one of my contentions was, that
because opinion might be erroneous,
therefore we ought to " shun the re-
sponsibility of putting any of our
opinions into practice." Tiiis is not
my "therefore," nor the proper "there-
fore ; " but this rather : that as our
opinions mui]) be erroneous, we ought
not tivvecfssarily to ride rough-shod
over the opinions of other.s — that while
acting upon our opinions, we should
proceed, not as if they were certain to
be right, but aft if, pi>xsihlj/, theij iniglit
be wroTiC; ; and that, therefore, if, in
our economy, sco|)e can be left, or
made, for the free play of contrary
opinion, left or made it ought to be.
A general may be of opinion that the
enemy is 40,000 strong. He ought to
act upon that opinion ; but he would
be a foul if he made no provision for
a sudden reversal of his idea.

Suppose that the city of London
determined to establish a number of
public hospitals, and that there came
to be determined the question of t. . t
.system of medicine to be adopted.
Alderman A proposes the allopathic
.system (which he knows to be the
best), and has the majority on his side.
Alderman B, who is an hom<eopathist,
urges that many of the people are of
his way of thinking; that, possibly,
the majority may be wrong ; and that
both kinds of hospitals ought to be
estal))ished, so that people of both
opinions may be accommodated. Alder-
man A says. " Certainly not. The
majority must act upon its opinion,
and not be deterred by the fact that

they may bo entirely wrong. If
homcL'opathists want special treatment
they can have it at their own expense,
and at other places." In such case,
Alderman B, in my opinion, is, most
undoubtedl}, i /lit. A is wrong, be-
cause he acts ipon his opinion a.s
though it werf t'le " ultimate infallible
credo." ^- my meaning now clear ?

This igineu case ir.i,y bo made
further useful. Allj^^athic hospitals
may be taken tr. lepresent Protestant
.schools, an'' homoeopathic hospitals.
Catholic schools. In such case Alder-
man C proposes that, ina.<Bmuch as the
people are not agreed upon the ques-
tion of medicine, there should not be
any practice at all, of a sectarian
character, in the hospitals. " We are
all agreed," he says, " upon surgical
matters; we are all agreed that nurs-
ing and low diet are beneficial in fever
cases; there is much about which
there is unanimity. There is a national
mandate tliu' far. Let us, then, have
non-sectarian ho.spitals, and if any
patient wants more than that, let him
pay for it out of his own pocket."
Then, quoting Mr. Le Sueur, he adds :
" Do not ask that the hospitals, which
all agree, are not only useful, but
necessary, shall be made subservient
to the propagation of your peculiar
ideas in these matters." Manitoba
has established non-sectarian hospitals
(as she choo.ses to call them), and
many of the people will make no use
of them. Could not Alderman B have
given them a better idea ?

Mr. Le Sueur gives me credit, also,
for tbe " idea of handing over local
minorities to local majorities, without
any check from the general law of the
land." My article was, as I under-
stand it, one long argument against
this idea— ac«i7(.s'^ the exercise of the
power of majorities; and I am in-
debted to my critic for the great sup-
port which he gives me. The single
sentence in my article which has led
Mr. Le Sueur astray refers to unan-
imities, and not to majorities and
minorities at all. " Practical unanimi-

Ii6

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

ty," or the disregard of merely " ec-
centric, or isolated opinion," I, fur one,
can by no means translate into a
" majority vote." And if I am asked,
" What power does ho look to, to check
a school-district which, dispensing
with practical unanimity, wants to
introduce some fad into the school by
a majority vote ? " the answer is
very simple : I look to the " check
from the general law of the land,"
which my critic makes me say that I
do not look to. I must have some
little license to speak for myself.

Passing from these misconceptions,
Mr. Le Sueur .says that "the State may,
therefore, be said to get a mandate
to establish secular schools. Does
the State get any bimilar mandate to
teach theology in the schools?" I beg
to recommend these sentences to Dr.
Bryce, and to Manitobans in general.
There is more point in them, I venture
to say, than will be admitted ; for they
avoid the inconsistency of arguing
from the principle of entire separation
of Church and State, to the practice
■of teaching some certain limited re-
ligion in the schools, and the exclusion
of a few degrees more of it. But Mr.
Le Sueur is speaking beside the facts.
If there was any mandate about which
Manitobans were moie emphatic than
another, it was that the schools should
not be secular. For the rest, the
mandate of the majority was to con-
tinue non-sectarian schools, and the
mandate of the minority to re-estab-
lish the old system. Mr. Le Sueur's
argument, leading, as it does, to secular
.schools, therefore, may for present
purposes be disregarded. The subject
is interesting, but purely academic,
so far as the pending controversy is
concerned.

I have to thank Mr. Le Sueur for an-
otber sentence : " Lil)erty consists in
being as Utile governed as possible,
and in having the largest possible
scope left for private initiative." Ap-
ply this to district X, and .some
scores of other districts in Manitoba.

In them, the Catholics, if "governed as
little as possible,' will be required to
keep their schools up to certain secu-
lar standards ; and will not be forbid-
den (for it is unnecessary) to comment
on the Bible-reading of the day, if
unanimously they desire to do so. Am
I not right ? Is it in the name of lib-
erty, or of tyranny, that all such com-
ment, when unanimously desired, is
by law stringently prohibited ? Is this
imposing the will of other people upon
them, or is it freedom to act as they
like?

Mr. Le Sueur is more successful, if I
may be allowed to say so, when he
advocates the rights of the Catholics
to " be allowed to count themselves
out," as he expresses it. Suppose this
was done, and that the Catholics of
district X applied for a charter under
which they could organize themselves
for the support of education. Tiiis
would not, surely, be refused them, so
long as every other good ])urpose is be-
ing aided in similar fashion. The char-
ter having been granted, suppose that
the Catholics in district X all became
members of the Association, and agreed
to pay certain rates per annum into
the exchequer, and to charge their
properties with the amounts, Mr. Le
Sueur would, I think, see nothing
wrong in all this. How far would he
thon be away from the separate school
system ? He will .say that the arrange-
ments would be purely voluntary. He
is aware that in Ontario every Catho-
lic must support the public schools un-
less he ooluntivnly supports some
separate school. Make the law the
same in Manitoba, and give each school
district a separate charter, or provide
for all by one general law, as you
wish. Thatditteronco, if insisted upon,
would not cau.se much grumbling or
discontent. Mr. Le Sueur is, I think,
more with me than with Dr. Bryce to
whom, nevertheloss, he say.s, " Well
done."

Winnipeg.

»»